aragorn's broken blade [Archive]

galadriel

10-06-2001, 02:24 PM

In some respects, yes, it seems a tad ridiculous to carry an old broken blade wherever you go. On the other hand, it was a precious heirloom and his carrying it had a lot of significance, marking him as the heir of Elendil and Isildur.

I'm not sure what he actually fought with. You're right, he must have had some kind of weapon, either another sword or a bow and arrow, when he was tramping around and killing evil things as a Ranger. If he had another weapon when he met the hobbits, Tolkien failed to mention it.

If I remember correctly, Peter Jackson & Co agree with you, and in the movie Aragorn will be carrying around a normal sword until he reaches Rivendell.

Selwythe

10-06-2001, 02:30 PM

Even if you break a sword in two, you can still use it. In fact, it will be sharper though a tad shorter ;)

Ñólendil

10-06-2001, 05:17 PM

There is a logical explanation as to why Aragorn would be carrying around a broken sword, but I have forgotten it. He certainly managed well enough without a whole one, didn't he?

afro-elf

10-06-2001, 05:38 PM

When you recall the reason PLEASE post it.

That bugged has me for awhile. when he was traisping around as thorongil. wouldn't denethor and his father( or anyone ) be a little curious as to why he was carrying a broken blade?

that is of course IF he carried ALL the time and not just before LOTR

And it's name is Epyon

10-09-2001, 11:10 PM

Was proof that He was Aragorn.

Snowdog

05-22-2002, 02:48 PM

My interpretation here from when I first read the books, whick was in 1976, but my mind's eye has always held to this. narsil was broken and was somewhat shorter than the full sword. If the first several inches is broken it is still quite a formidable weapon. Also, it would only be known to be broken when unsheathed, and when he offered his sword in allegence to the King of Rohan and th Steward of Gondor, questions may have mcome to him, but I could see them turned aside eloquently by Aragorn. Also, a broken and notched sword (Boromir's showed much use) was a sign of being a good warrior.
One needs to forget the image of Narsil of the PJ movie.

Tar-Elendil

05-22-2002, 05:30 PM

well the most easily explained reason was that he thought the sword so precious and valuable that he could not just leave it in imladris and depart from it. what else is kinda weird is he sets off intot he wild with th e sword the same year sauron openly declared himself in mordor (2951 TA)

Christiana

05-22-2002, 09:41 PM

I read somewhere that he only ocasionally carried Narsil. He needed to show the hobbits ptoof he was Aragorn.

Andúril

02-14-2003, 03:12 PM

AE:
When did he start carrying it around ?The Lord of the Rings, Appendix A, pg 338:

‘But when Estel was only twenty years of age, it chanced that he returned to Rivendell after great deeds with the company of the sons of Elrond; and Elrond looked at him and was pleased, for he saw that he was fair and noble and was early come to manhood, though he would yet become greater in body and in mind. That day Elrond called him by his true name, and told him who he was and whose son; and he delivered to him the heirlooms of his house.
’”Here is the ring of Barahir,” he said, “the token of our kinship from afar; and here also are the shards of Narsil. With these you may yet do great deeds; for I foretell that the span of your life shall be greater than the measure of Men, unless evil befalls you or you fail at the test. But the test will be hard and long. The Sceptre of Annúminas I withhold, for you have yet to earn it.”According to Appendix B (pg 370) this happened in 2951 TA.

I assume Aragorn would have carried the shards around as soon as he took ownership of them.

trolls' bane

02-14-2003, 09:20 PM

Aragorn's sword was given not only as an heirloom, but also because it was reforged, which means it could be used again.

Dúnedain

02-14-2003, 10:58 PM

Originally posted by trolls' bane
Aragorn's sword was given not only as an heirloom, but also because it was reforged, which means it could be used again.

But it was given to him before it was reforged...

trolls' bane

06-21-2007, 07:04 AM

True, true. It only makes logical sense.

EDIT: This thread contains my first post!

Noble Elf Lord

06-21-2007, 09:41 AM

trolls' bane

06-21-2007, 09:48 AM

Yes, but those damn movie script writers moved the forging of the sword into the third movie. Bugger! But. Since the sword was broken it needed less space, and I think that Aragorn used another sword for fighting and carried Narsil as a reminder and as a light in darkness, to avoid forgetting his heritage and fate. Even though Narsil was a sword of great length, broken, it hardly needed anymore space than a long knife. By the way, if you notice some grammar mistakes in my posts, please make me know, for I wish to even further improve my English. :cool: :D

An interesting point. But now I'm not quite sure when Narsil was reforged. Did the event indeed take place during the first book? I made the big mistake, when I read them, of reading two Star Wars books in between, thereby messing up any hope of an accurate flow of events in the story.

No, no mistake at all. Very well put, actually.

Noble Elf Lord

06-21-2007, 10:06 AM

An interesting point. But now I'm not quite sure when Narsil was reforged. Did the event indeed take place during the first book? I made the big mistake, when I read them, of reading two Star Wars books in between, thereby messing up any hope of an accurate flow of events in the story.

No, no mistake at all. Very well put, actually.

Either in the first book or before - hardly before though. Because I remember a spot from the book where Aragorn (and the rest of the Fellowship) prepare to battle the Goblins in Mazarbul, Aragorn says: "They´ll come to fear the hall of Mazarbul!" (not an exact quote, since I do not own the English version) and after that he tests the blade of Anduril with his fingers. I believe this is enough proof that by then the sword was reforged. :cool:

mithrand1r

06-21-2007, 02:52 PM

An interesting point. But now I'm not quite sure when Narsil was reforged. Did the event indeed take place during the first book? I made the big mistake, when I read them, of reading two Star Wars books in between, thereby messing up any hope of an accurate flow of events in the story.

No, no mistake at all. Very well put, actually.

IIRC, The sword was reforged during the Council of Elrond, before the fellowship embarked on their journey southward.

IIRC, the sword is described as being broken near the tip (or end) of the sword. (I do not remember where, but I think it took place in the Chapter on Strider at the Prancing Pony.)

I have envisioned this as a sword missing only the last 10-12 inches (25.4-30.48cm) of its blade. The sword still has a usable length of about 3ft (1m) in length. This is sufficient for orc necks. ;)

Christiana

06-21-2007, 03:16 PM

But in FOTR (book) Aragorn says to Sam "not much use, is it Sam? But the time is near when it shall be forged anew."

mithrand1r: the blade is described as being broken a foot below the hilt, not a foot from the tip, which wouldn't give Aragorn a sword of any length to fight with. He might have had another sword to fight with, but was carrying Narsil as proof to the hobbits of who he was and also as a reminder that the shards would soon be forged again and he would have to assume all the burdens that that entailed.

trolls' bane

06-21-2007, 03:26 PM

Thank you all. You're awesome.

I am now convinced more than ever that I need to re-read the books.

mithrand1r

06-22-2007, 05:38 PM

Landroval

06-23-2007, 12:52 AM

IIRC, The sword was reforged during the Council of Elrond, before the fellowship embarked on their journey southward.
Well, not during the Council, but surely before the journey
The Sword of Elendil was forged anew by Elvish smiths, and on its blade was traced a device of seven stars set between the crescent Moon and the rayed Sun, and about them was written many runes; for Aragorn son of Arathorn was going to war upon the marches of Mordor.
the blade is described as being broken a foot below the hilt, not a foot from the tip, which wouldn't give Aragorn a sword of any length to fight with.
Indeed
He drew out his sword, and they saw that the blade was indeed broken a foot below the hilt.

mithrand1r

06-23-2007, 10:54 PM

Well, not during the Council, but surely before the journey
Indeed

True. Actually, I was referring to the location in the book where this occurred.

It does bring a funny image to mind. A blacksmith hammering away in reforging the sword while people in the council are trying to listen to someone describe the history of the ring.

:p
p851

trolls' bane

06-24-2007, 03:55 AM

True. Actually, I was referring to the location in the book where this occurred.

It does bring a funny image to mind. A blacksmith hammering away in reforging the sword while people in the council are trying to listen to someone describe the history of the ring.

:p
p851
"So who--" CLANG! "--shall--" CLANG! "--take the ring to--" CLANG! "--Oh, for Eru's sake, will you shut up!" :D

Lefty Scaevola

07-01-2007, 09:44 PM

It is rather odd to me that he carried the broken sword, other that some unexplaied symbolism of it.
I suppose, without any evidence, that is also posbbile that carried some still useful enchament, although it is clear that some of the enchantments were lost when is was broken ("its light was extinguished"). If so, it might have be particularly powerful reforged with both some of the old enchantments(Dwarven, by their greatest smith, Telcar) and new, Noldrin enchantments.

Christiana

07-01-2007, 10:55 PM

I think it's main power lay in the symbolism.

Valandil

07-02-2007, 12:24 AM

I was looking for this and couldn't find it - but I think there's a suggestion somewhere that Aragorn had left the area around Bree and the Shire for a quick "errand" of some sort back to Rivendell.

I may have seen this in a Michael Martinez article, but I don't recall which one, or which place he quoted Tolkien on that (and he usually does so - quite fluently). MM speculated that Aragorn did not normally carry Narsil's shards around with him, but went back to Rivendell to get them just before he would meet up with the hobbits - wanting to have that on him as the crucial times drew near - of the Ring's finding and the nearing re-forging of that blade (even to have on him the very blade used to cut from Sauron's finger the Ring which would be coming into his presence for the first time).

Wish I could give more concrete information than that.

GrayMouser

07-02-2007, 10:30 AM

trolls' bane

07-02-2007, 09:51 PM

Yes, it was just before the point where Obi-wan taught Aragorn to let the Force flow through him. I always remember that because of the following part, where Elrond and Yoda revealed that Darth Vader had been revived and was leading the Nazgul. Hope that clears it up :)
Oh, right. That was before they destroyed the One Yuuzhan Vong Worlship, right?

Kevin McIntyre

09-12-2007, 09:25 PM

wouldn't it have been better for aragorn to leave the shards of is blade in imladris?

and carry a real sword with him

his dad and grand dad where killed in the wilds.

When did he start carrying it around ?

he HAD to use other blades when he was younger in the guise of thorongil

I don't believe Aragorn carried all the shards with him, that really seams far-fetched, however a foot long blade would have a use in the wild as a knife. I am not sure if Narsil had any runes on it (like the reforged Anduril did) so it may have gone unrecognized by the Steward of Gondor (who may not have known what the hilt looked like anyway). Besides if Aragorn carried a full sized sword with him (which isn't clear to me from the story) it would be what is presented to any steward or king when submitting to their service.

olsonm

09-14-2007, 02:33 AM

I may have seen this in a Michael Martinez article, but I don't recall which one, or which place he quoted Tolkien on that (and he usually does so - quite fluently). MM speculated that Aragorn did not normally carry Narsil's shards around with him, but went back to Rivendell to get them just before he would meet up with the hobbits

I also read that article (or one just like it) by MM. It was as good an explanation as any I've seen on the question. The theory suggests that Aragorn retrieved the shards more for the symbolism then anything else. He wouldn't have thought he needed to identify himself to the hobbits since he believed Gandalf would be there.

And since the sword was only to be reforged when the Ring was found it would make sense that it should journey with the Ring to Rivendell. Especially if the shards were no longer kept in Rivendell as MM also suggested in the article.

Unfortunately for Aragorn, Gandalf disappeared, the Ringwraiths arrived and he was in the wild with a broken sword.

Gordis

09-14-2007, 04:34 AM

I don't think Aragorn had Narsil with him when he served in Gondor and Rohan. Aragorn came there not to claim kinship (yet) so he must have kept his heirlooms (Narsil and the Ring of Barahir) hidden. The Steward Ecthelion and Denethor would have recognized the blade, as would the King Thengel who spent his youth in Gondor. Even young Eomer, when later Aragorn shows him Anduril and says " Here is the Sword that was Broken and is forged again! ", understands what he is talking about.

For 17 years before 3018 Aragorn was hunting for Gollum. That task took him to very perilous places, like Morgul Vale and near the Black gate. Do you think he had Narsil with him? I guess not - as being captured with this blade would be far worse than death. The blade, if dicovered, would lead the prisoner to Barad Dur for questioning by the Dark Lord himself.

So, when did he start to carry the blade with him - or why?

"When" is the easiest here, as he must have passed through Imladris on his way from Mirkwood where he had delivered the captured Gollum. That would be somewhere in spring 3018.

Why did he take the broken blade with him when going towards the Shire?
I guess when Gandalf told him about Gollum's revelations Aragorn must have understood that THE time – his time- has finally come. Elrond might have confirmed this thought - he foresaw the future to an extent. Maybe Elrond has foretold that the contests that would await him on this quest “would not be fought with weapons?” (see the quote below)”

Anyway, starting from Imladris, instead of a normal, functional, blade Aragorn has taken what remained of Narsil -and it was not more than a knife, only one foot of the blade left. I say "instead" basing on this quote from the Letters where Tolkien criticizes the Weathertop scene in the Zimmerman's film script.
Strider does not 'Whip out a sword' in the book. Naturally not: his sword was broken. (Its elvish light is another false anticipation of the reforged Anduril. Anticipation is one of Z's chief faults.) Why then make him do so here, in a contest that was explicitly not fought with weapons? L#210

Olmer

09-14-2007, 08:46 AM

I don't think he ever carried the broken sword, because it would be outright stupid practice for a such wise man.
He had to do the tidings which required some kind of ID, and this why he brought the sword to Bree. He doesn't have to travel far to get it, because he fetched it from Dunedain's station at Sarn Ford.

Gordis

09-14-2007, 04:44 PM

Oh - but it would have been so careless to leave the Sword with rangers at Sarn Ford! And what if it has got lost or taken by enemies?
Nay, I would say Rivendell was the only safe place for such a thing...

As for ID... I doubt it served for much with the Hobbits. They have only learned about the broken sword because Gandalf had included the rhyme in his letter. But an agent of the enemy could have shown hobbits any broken sword - they wouldn't know the difference.

As I said before, Aragorn carrying the broken sword around - instead of a normal one - sounds weird. This is the only case when the movie version seems to make more sense. :rolleyes:

olsonm

09-16-2007, 02:29 AM

As I said before, Aragorn carrying the broken sword around - instead of a normal one - sounds weird.

I don't think it's sounds weird if he was carrying the sword for symbolic reasons, not realizing he would need to fight.

Gordis

09-16-2007, 05:17 AM

For symbolic reasons - certainly. And as it happened, he didn't need a sword to fight as the battle with the nazgul "was not fought with weapons"

At Weathertop and at the Ford Aragorn didn't take out a knife, he didn't use Narsil - only flaming branches.
He also told the hobbits to use flaming branches, but not to bare their swords. It was their own idea to use Barrow-Downs swords that has saved Frodo, actually.

The question is how could Aragorn know beforehand that he wouldn't meet say orcs or trolls or evil men? Then he would be sorely lacking a sword. How could he know he would be facing the nazgul -as they came quite unexpectedly for him as well?

olsonm

09-17-2007, 12:40 AM

The question is how could Aragorn know beforehand that he wouldn't meet say orcs or trolls or evil men? Then he would be sorely lacking a sword.

It would seem unlikely for Aragorn to expect to encounter any of these beings on the road to Rivendell. And he did expect Gandalf to be there. So he took a calculated risk based on his considerable knowledge of the area.

Gordis

09-17-2007, 01:09 AM

The area was far from safe at best - there is a lot of evidence to support this. And the rangers were spread thinly over it. There were lots of fugitives on the road, some of them unfriendly and dangerous.
No, I think it was no calculation - Aragorn's decison must have been based on foresight: his own, or Elrond's.

Ang hmm... have you noticed that Glorfindel apperently had no sword either. At least, it was not mentioned even once...

Olmer

09-17-2007, 01:10 AM

The question is how could Aragorn know beforehand that he wouldn't meet say orcs or trolls or evil men? Then he would be sorely lacking a sword.
Cause he was quite familiar with a surrounding and knew perfectly well that the last ever known wandering on the west side trolls have, literally, got stoned, the last time when anyone saw orcs in Eriador was nearly 300 years ago at the Greenfield battle. As for the evil men...since the time, when Gondorean army went through the three kingdoms of Arnor, annihilating "evil men", the area has got turned into a kind of Stephen King's Wasteland.I think that the only surviving evil men,who were lurking in desolated areas, known to the dwellers of Bree and the surrounding, were the dunedain themselves.
So, Aragorn could bravely walk around with the broken sword, which is still seems to me as an extremely unwise behavior.

olsonm

09-17-2007, 01:17 AM

What Olmer said.

Gordis

09-17-2007, 01:19 AM

Ahh, we have cross-posted, Olmer...
What say you about this quote? Was Aragorn lying?

Lonely men are we, Rangers of the wild, hunters--but hunters ever of the servants of the Enemy; for they are found in many places, not in Mordor only.
`If Gondor, Boromir, has been a stalwart tower, we have played another part. Many evil things there are that your strong walls and bright swords do not stay. You know little of the lands beyond your bounds. Peace and freedom, do you say? The North would have known them little but for us. Fear would have destroyed them. But when dark things come from the houseless hills, or creep from sunless woods, they fly from us. What roads would any dare to tread, what safety would there be in quiet lands, or in the homes of simple men at night, if the Dúnedain were asleep, or were all gone into the grave?
`And yet less thanks have we than you. Travellers scowl at us, and countrymen give us scornful names. "Strider" I am to one fat man who lives within a day's march of foes that would freeze his heart or lay his little town in ruin, if he were not guarded ceaselessly.

olsonm

09-17-2007, 02:03 AM

True, it would have been dangerous for Butterbur to wander the wilds with a broken sword. But Aragorn isn't Butterbur.

Olmer

09-17-2007, 09:39 AM

Aha, Lady of the Ulairi ;) , but we have almost the same answer.
The dark things which are freezing people heart could only be the wraith (you know your people's best quality ;) ).
I think, during Angmar's regime the daggers, which were turning an opposition into allies, have been pretty much in use. So the Arnoreans from King's dinasty worked out protection and remedies against the "wrathness" in all its aspects.
And who, if not Aragorn, would know better that at the chance meeting the regular swords are a small comfort.
I guess, only that could excuse the abcense of the Guardian Aragorn's sword.

Gordis

09-17-2007, 01:57 PM

Here, let us look at Aragorn's activities in summer 3018:

Strider looked grave. 'I came west with him [Gandalf] in the spring. I have often kept watch on the borders of the Shire in the last few years, when he was busy elsewhere. He seldom left it unguarded. We last met on the first of May: at Sam Ford down the Brandywine. He told me that his business with you had gone well, and that you would be starting for Rivendell in the last week of September. As I knew he was at your side, I went away on a journey of my own. And that has proved ill; for plainly some news reached him, and I was not at hand to help.
'I am troubled, for the first time since I have known him. We should have had messages, even if he could not come himself. When I returned, many days ago, I heard the ill news. The tidings had gone far and wide that Gandalf was missing and the horsemen had been seen. It was the Elven-folk of Gildor that told me this; and later they told me that you had left your home; but there was no news of your leaving Buckland. I have been watching the East Road anxiously.'

That's what we have:
February 1 - Aragorn captures Gollum in Dead Marches (see UT)
March 21 - He brings Gollum to Mirkwood (UT). There he also meets Gandalf and learns that Sauron started looking for his Ring and learned about "Shire" and "Baggins".
April 12 Gandalf comes to Hobbiton (Tale of Years), Aragorn returns west with him, but then goes to Sarn Ford (see the quote above)
May 1 Aragorn meets Gandalf at Sarn Ford
May-August(?) Aragorn goes on a "journey of his own" - most likely goes to visit Arwen in Rivendell. ;)
September - Aragorn returns to Bree, swordless (but with Narsil),
About Sept 25 - he first hears news of the Black Riders - from Gildor. Gandalf is missing.

So, despite the disquiting info learned from Gollum, Aragorn was happily loosing his time all the summer. ;) About this time he substituted his functional sword by a piece of historical junk - but the junk proving him the Rightful King. :D Why??? Why didn't they grab Frodo right there and then - in April - to lead him to Rivendell safely and at leasure?

olsonm

09-17-2007, 07:17 PM

Why didn't they grab Frodo right there and then - in April - to lead him to Rivendell safely and at leasure?

As always with Gandalf's strategies, stealth and secrecy were the most impotant. He didn't want Frodo to just disappear. He wanted to gather a little information before setting out. Unfortunately this led him to Saruman.

Olmer

09-18-2007, 02:54 PM

About this time he substituted his functional sword by a piece of historical junk - but the junk proving him the Rightful King. :D Why????
I guess, in case if he, by chance, will meet Boromir (or some other representative from Gondor) before they reach Rivendell, so in a doubt he could have a prove that he is not a sleeping under the bushes vagrant, but the rightfull heir of Gondor's throne. :D
He brought the news to Elrond of Frodo's exact arriving with the Ring to Rivendell, and the invitation to the interested parties had been sent beforehead. This why (what a surprise!!) everybody came to Imladris at the same time but under a different pretense. :rolleyes: So, the arrival of the rival has been expected. :D ;)

Valandil

09-24-2007, 11:07 PM

Currently in *re-read mode* - I just found the reference Michael Martinez must have bee referring to when speculating that Aragorn took an opportunity to go back to Rivendell for the shards:

In "Strider" (Ch. 10 of Book I), while they're discussing Gandalf's possible whereabouts:

Stider looked grave. 'I do not know,' he said. 'I came west with him in the spring. I have often kept watch on the borders of the Shire in the last few years, when he was busy elsewhere. He seldom left it unguarded. We last met on the first of May: at the Sarn Ford down the Brandywine. He told me that his business with you had gone well, and that you would be starting for Rivendell in the last week of September. As I knew he was at you side, I went away on a journey of my own. And that has proved ill; for plainly some news reached him, and I was not at hand to help.

Not a reach at all, to think that from the start of June to sometime in September, Strider may have gone back to Rivendell to bring the shards with him, for accompanying the Ring back to Rivendell.

Olmer

09-25-2007, 11:24 AM

As always with Gandalf's strategies, stealth and secrecy were the most impotant. Unfortunately this led him to Saruman.
Gandalf has to have a serious examination of his head, because, as always, Gandalf's strategy sucks.
He did not trust Saruman enough to tell him about a suspicious "unwholesome" ring, yet he goes to him to discuss the protection of the Ring of Power from Nazgul. :rolleyes:

Jon S.

09-25-2007, 10:00 PM

I'm not sure what your day job is, Olmert, nor would I ask here (so uncool ;) ) but in mine, with my Office Director (who can be analogized to the Head of Gandalf's Order), I don't knock on his door with suspicions, I save my visits (and my "currency" with him) for more concrete, certain interruptions. Gandalf's actions - and inaction - with Saruman that seem to approximate a mental condition with you appear, to me, to be standard operating procedure vis-a-vis a superior.